Court finds all asserted claims invalid for obviousness

Allergan, Inc., Allergan USA, Inc., Allergan Sales L.L.C., Endo Pharmaceuticals Solutions Inc., and Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Watson Laboratories, Inc- Florida, Sandoz Inc., and Paddock Laboratories, Inc., C. A. No. 09-cv-511 (GMS), March 31, 2012.

Sleet, C. J.  Court makes post-trial findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding invalidity and infringement in favor of defendants.

A seven-day bench trial was held May 2 – 10, 2011 in this ANDA case involving an invention that is directed to pharmaceutical compositions that allow for once daily dosage forms of trospium.  The court finds that the asserted claims are not invalid due to anticipation, but they are invalid due to obviousness.  In addition, defendants’ claim that two claims are invalid due to indefiniteness was rejected.  Defendants’ assertion of lack of written description of a disputed claim is also rejected. Defendants’ accused products are found to infringe the patents-in-suit.  The parties’ Rule 52(c) motions are granted in part and denied in part.  The court directs entry of final judgment in favor of defendants and against the plaintiffs.

Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
http://depatentlaw.morrisjames.com/admin/trackback/275396
Comments (0) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.







Remember personal info?
Send To A Friend Use this form to send this entry to a friend via email.